Hystery

Believe me, stupid drivers are a world-wide spread plague...

Imagine this, transposed to other professions. "Yes, I wanted to become a firefighter. But I fear for my life, so when there's a fire, I'll just stand back and spray some water rather than walk into the building to save the people in it. I wouldn't want to get hurt while on duty." That's so ludicrous.

So, maybe you haven't heard of it, but maybe you did, since here, overseas, it is yet another polemic around the US police that made it in the news, and more particularly, the Oklahoma City police department. Police were investigating a hit-and-run and arrived at the home of Madgiel Sanchez, 35, after the pick-up supposedly involved in the hit-and-run was seen parking at his home, and was shot dead by Sgt Chris Barns after ordering him to drop the metal pipe he was holding. The thing is, Madgiel Sanchez was deaf and mute, and therefore couldn't hear the police officers orders, nor communicate with them. And despite Madgiel Sanchez's own daughter, along with several neighbours screaming Madgiel Sanchez was deaf, Sgt Chris Barns, second officer on scene, ignored those details (or, as he says it, 'did not hear them'), and took the decision to shoot the man who was declared deceased on scene in front of his house. The first officer on scene actually pulled his taser, but it was the second officer arriving on scene, Sgt Chris Barns, who pulled out his gun immediately. And while the first officer on scene fired his taser, Sgt Chris Barns, actually fired his gun, multiple times, and shot the man dead. Neighbours and witnesses claimed Madgiel Sanchez was always carrying this metallic pipe with him, not as a weapon, but because it helped him shoo away stray dogs as he ran laps around a parking lot, as well as helping him communicate with people, moving it around to convey what he was trying to say. Those same motions he made towards police officers probably to convey a message that got ignored. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/20/us/oklahoma-city-police-shooting-deaf.html?mcubz=1 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/21/oklahoma-city-police-shooting-magdiel-sanchez-deaf

They did claim it was them by now. Though nowadays I feel like they claim anything happening is them just so they can take credit, even if it might not be actually them.

I see people putting MP5 and UMP in the same bag, but I'd like to remind that the UMP can use 0.45 ACP ammo (like the infamous USP or P22X handgun series), on the contrary of the MP5 which is chambered exclusively for 9mm ammo. On a side note, I tend to believe the UMP is much more fitting and efficient for close-quarter combat than an actual rifle.

His neck magically broke in the van, officers ain't nothing to do with it. /sarcasm off

As Kallus Rourke said, make sure you installed all the lines necessary for the game to recognize what you're trying to spawn. That includes the vehicles.meta line, and the carvariations line, that have to be added manually in said files (while when you simply replace an existing model, it uses the existing lines linked to that specific model in those files). If it isn't done properly, the game won't be able to find what you're asking it to spawn and will ultimately freeze and/or crash.

1/ Your reply doesn't make sense. 2/ Be more accurate. 3/ Provide sources to support your opinion. Thanks!

Fair enough :)

You're discussing semantics there. You perfectly know what I mean by off-duty. There's a difference between being ACTIVELY on-duty, where you're in uniform and directly answer to dispatch calls, and being off-duty where you're just in plain clothes and live your life of human being. Sure, if needed, you can be called back in even if it's out of your shift hours, but otherwise you're off-duty, you don't answer to dispatch and you do your own things. And during those times, you don't need your weapon in a doctor's office or a hospital, because there's nothing to be afraid of in those. Unless you're afraid of needles or hypochondriac, but again, a gun won't help in those cases. Is that your way of life though? To always expect the worst that can happen, so you have to be prepared to anything? By following this way of life, everyone should wear bullerproof vests, because you never know when you can be shot, everyone should drive tanks, because you never know when you might have a car accident, everyone should have a bunker, because you never know when a thermo-nuclear war might be unleashed upon us. Always fearing that something might happen, anything, anywhere.That's toxic for anyone's well-being, and ridiculous in its logic. I'm perfectly aware you've guns and so do your police (even though almost every police around the globe carry guns, so that's kinda irrelevant). Also, never said anything about someone being uncomfortable. All I said was that the owner of the doctor's office or the hospital's staff has every right to ask the badge and ID of someone carrying a weapon, just like they have every right to ask them to leave their weapon somewhere else for the time they are in, because you've absolutely no reason to have a gun when walking into whether of those places. Now if you indeed have stats that prove doctor's offices and hospitals are places where there's frequently shootings and terrorist bombings, I'll gladly admit you absolutely need your gun when you go to your doctor or the nearest hospital, though I'm gonna be honest and say that I already know they aren't, therefore there's no gun needed, because you and your family are perfectly safe in those.

That's nice and all to have stats, but that's irrelevant to what I'm saying. You go to the doctor, you don't need your gun, cop or not. You're in plain cloth, you're off-duty. Therefore the owner has all rights to ask why there's a gun at your belt and to ask for a badge and ID. Especially in a doctor office or hospital. What's there to fear in those, to catch a cold? Afraid a gun won't help much as you can't shoot diseases. And for all the guy knows, the person in front of him could be anyone.

If they're in plain clothes they're off-duty. And if they're off-duty, they don't need their firearm, therefore it's normal for someone to not want to see them. Even more so in a doctor office/hospital. They've nothing to fear for their life.

I'll miss the good old red/blue design, it was original compared to all the dark tone/white liveries all over the place.

It also can happen that a gun jams. Although rare, that's what saved a police officer's life a couple years back when a suspect took it from him and tried to shoot him. Guns aren't 100% reliable.

He's a moron for saying that police officers should work on de-escalating dangerous situations rather than resorting to draw their guns on almost every occasion, which dramatically escalate things into a possibly deadly outcome? He's a moron, for saying that the good outcome for a police officer would be for both him AND the suspect to be alive? I personally don't think he's a moron. Drawing your gun should be a last resort, drawing your gun should be only when you're ultimately sure you're going to shoot what you're going to aim at. Otherwise, a police officer should work through talking and dissuading whoever is in front of him to put his gun down/surrender. Like this police officer in this video: Rather than drawing his gun, he's going to talk the person through, and eventually going to make him put his knife down. If that happened in the US, the guy with the knife would have been shot dead by 15 rounds in the chest. Besides, for US soldiers to actually have a lower death rate than police officers speaks for itself. Either they're sent to very, very peaceful areas (because everyone knows Afghanistan is a walk to the park compared to Detroit and such), OR... or... they actually know how to deal with an armed threat.

I actually remember an ex-US soldier interviewed by a TV channel during the events of Fergusson. He explicitly said that police was doing things wrong with their weapons as, in the army, you're taught to -not- escalate things and to point your weapon at someone only when you're ready to pull the trigger. While police just draw their guns for almost the slightest thing and thus just make things escalate quickly and dangerously. Here, at 9:54.

No, it doesn't have to be illegal, anything that is under control by the government but sold outside of that circle is black market. The definition you yourself quoted says that.

And that definition is exactly what I said above. A black market makes its money on anything, banned or not banned. So yes, swarming the regular market with weapons will inevitably grow the black market offer through civilian to civilian transaction, and therefore will increase the chances for a criminal or a terrorist to get their hands on one of them.

Yes, except that no, not at all. There's a black market for car parts. Does that mean car parts are outlawed? Of course not. There's a black market for a lot of things that aren't outlawed. Hell, here's the definition of black market, just for you two guys: "Economic activity that takes place outside government-sanctioned channels. Black market transactions usually occur “under the table” to let participants avoid government price controls or taxes." That's all it is. And if you make guns available for all civilians like that, you can be sure as hell that some of them are going to be sold hand to hand from civilian to civilian like that, until they end in the hands of a criminal or a terrorist. That's already what happens right now, with just very few guns in circulation, imagine if the market was swarmed with them.

Yes, black market will alwaysh ave material regardless of the law, you are right. But if you allow more guns to be in circulation, it's only logical that the black market offers will in turn grow bigger and allow for more criminals or terrorists to get weapons. That's just how it is. Also, it's not comparable with marijuana. You don't use marijuana to kill other people. I'm favorable to a controlled market of marijuana to allow users to buy their susbtance safely and not having to deal with dealers and other shady characters. Of course I can. I can rely on the law enforcement do solve any problem that isn't law abiding (and not "everything"). Because that's their job. They're trained and paid and voluteer to take the risk to do it, not me. That's not blind trust, that's a trust any citizen should have, because we aren't trained to solve non-law abiding situations. LEOs are. I'm always amused to see americans screaming "SECOND AMENDMENT!" every time a topic switches to gun control. It's a constitution. A constitution almost 200 years old. Do you know how many times we changed/reformed our constitution in France during this period of time? Five times. Our current constitution is the fifth version. Every time the context and situation required for our constitution to change, we did it, to fit with the current context and situation so it wouldn't fall outdated and hold us back. Maybe it'd be time for americans to think about modernizing their constitutions a little as well to fit better with modern society. Because the whole "we need guns in case our government turns into tyranny" is definitely outdated by now.

That's a lot of 'ifs' just to justify the carrying of a weapon, don't you think? If, if, if. If we go that way, better never getting out of our houses unless we have tanks or armored cars, because you never know what might happen. There's always a part of unknown. Just because it exists doesn't justify to take drastic decisions such as arming civils. I, for instance, wouldn't live in a society that prefers to trust into guns to save them rather than their own police officers, and where I'd be suspicious or afraid of any passerby because I don't know if they have a gun or not and what they might do to me with it. Cultural thing. You don't happen to accidently kill people with a knife. And that's why we deliver driver licenses, to make sure people know how to handle their cars. I'll never get those kinds of comparison, they're kinda ludicrous. Also, if terrorists already can get themselves AK-47s, what is it going to be if civilians can get weapons themselves? It'll provide material for a black market. Which in turn will make it even easier for terrorists to get weapons. No thanks.

For one case where a shopper managing to shoot down the robber trying to get him/the cashier, how many cases of guns handled badly and shooting a family member/friend? And how many cases of guns being stolen and used for crimes, or sold to the black market only then to be used for crimes? One good doesn't compensate ten wrongs. Other than that, that's pretty off-topic since it's not even about terrorism, but I'll take half the blame for that.

If you can run away, technically you don't get slaughtered. And if you can't run away, then you'll get slaughtered anyway because you won't have time to attack or retaliate. Therefore, allowing a civilian to carry a gun wouldn't change anything to the situation. Therefore, it's pointless to give him one. It's not complicated really. If arming civilians was such an easy solution to possible criminality and terrorist attacks, why would we bother paying millions of currency in taxes to train and pay police officers? If we have police officers, that's for a reason. They have training, and they know what to do. A civilian doesn't, and is just a liability if he's allowed to carry a gun, because you don't know what he might do with it.

If they don't know how to use their weapons, I'd rather run for my life and call for the cops who'd bring a fitting response team (GIGN/GIPN/RAID) rather than trying to play the hero and die like an idiot.

Not armed enough? That's a very american way to see things. "Bring more guns to fight guns". Do you want cops to carry FAMAS/G36/M4, just in case a terrorist shows up? That doesn't work like that. I'd rather not to face a terrorist whatsoever, which implies that the intelligence services do their job, and I'd prefer to give cops less weapons and transfer the fundings to the intelligence services so they make sure I wouldn't have to face a terrorist. And if I ultimately faced one, a gun wouldn't help me, because those guys don't wait for you to draw a gun before shooting you, they'll shoot me immediately either way, and I'll be dead either way.